But what the hell - I may have it all wrong! Have you an alternative
model which avoids the impost of domain name applicants avoiding
paying their share of the domain administrator's legal defense fund?
Nope. My sole concern was big government deciding to have the whole pie.
If your considered opinion (and I mean that and not any sarcastic mode)
is that we can get self-governance with an immunity, I'm all for it. If
that comes at a cost of *including* some arm of government, I don't have
any qualms. If we just abrogate it forever off to somebody else I think
we'd have done ourselves, and the future a disservice.
I don't think getting to be a self-defining root of name legitemacy even
just in internet contexts is plausible. We're going to have to demonstrate
an understanding of the legitemate IPR issues trade faces in general. Looks
to me like we have the competency on the list, so perhaps all we need to do
is prove we're not thick enough to believe *anybody* has all the answers yet.
Another thing worrying me is that we probably need to seek this for the
ISO-2 letter space and not specifically for com.au. I can't see any problem
inside com.au which cannot be forseen to exist in peer 2LD.
Here's one back:
the defence fund serves two purposes: one is to defend against
making the incorrect assignment of a name, and the other is to
defend against making the incorrect non-assignment of a name.
Which reason do you think will empty the pot faster?
-George